Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay. Welcome back. Excuse me. Welcome back, folks. This afternoon, we are starting our, review and introduction to H-five 94. We have the bill's chief, lead sponsor here, representative Maguire, our very own representative Maguire. So he's gonna do his bill introduction, then Katie is gonna do a walk through, for us. So the floor is yours, kind sir.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Thank you so much. For the record, representative Eric Maguire, Rutland City. Thank you, madam chair and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to introduce H-five 94, the Temporary Emergency Housing and Accountability Program and return home family unification program. The status quo reflects a belief that most compassionate responses to homelessness is to keep emergency housing available for as long as it's needed. Even when the system cannot offer structure services or a clear path forward. It prioritizes immediate harm reduction, but tolerates long term instability, isolation, and public in visibility in the name of avoiding challenging decisions. The underlining value is that preventing disruption today is more important than designing a system that reliably produces stability tomorrow. H594, the temporary emergency house and accountability program and return home program reflects a belief that compassion includes responsibility, structure, and honesty about what works. It values emergency housing as a critical safety net, but not as a permanent living arrangement, and it insists that public systems should help people move forward rather than simply contain crisis. The underlining value is that dignity is not just sheltered tonight, but progress toward a stable life. Under the status quo responsibility is diffused and largely unspoken. Individuals are not asked to engage consistently, because the system cannot reliably deliver services. And the system itself is rarely held accountable, because decisions are made through emergency extensions, and executive discretion. The value implicit here is avoiding the avoidance of conflict, even if that avoidance leads to stagnation and rising costs. Under age five ninety four, responsibility is explicit and shared. The state is required to provide capacity, staffing, accommodations and due process, and individuals are expected to engage where they are able. When a system fails, people are protected from penalty, and the legislation receives the data and corrective action plans. The value here is fairness, clear expectations paired with real safe guys. The status quo values flexibility through informality, because obligations, commitments and responsibilities are minimal. Decisions can be made quickly in crisis, but outcomes vary widely by geography, provider and moment in time. That flexibility comes at a cost of predictability, transparency and public trust. H594 values flexibility through structure, it sets up clear tiers, time horizons, and placement standards were allowing movement between them based on need, responsivity and capacity. This approach values consistency and transparency without riggity. Under the status quo, hotels and motels are treated as a necessary long term solution, despite being isolating, expensive, and poorly connected to services. The value embedded here is expedience, using what is available rather than building what is effective. Under age five ninety four hotels are recognized as a temporary tool of last resort. The bill values investing into shelters, housing and workforce capacity, even when that requires deliberate transition and oversight. The value is effectiveness over convenience. The status quo keeps homeless in a constant state of political emergency. Decisions are revisited annually, often under pressure and protections that should be settled, remain subject to debate. The value here is short term stability in a political moment, even if the long term uncertainties persist. The contrast is this. The status quo prioritizes endurance, while H594 prioritizes progress. The status quo keeps people housed, but often stopped. H594 keeps people safe while insisting the system be better and do better rather than standing still. At its heart, H five ninety four is about restoring balance to a system that has drift away from the Vermont values on all sides. Most of us believe three things at the same time, that people in crisis deserve dignity and safety, that public systems should help people move forward, and that taxpayers deserve honesty about what is working and what is not. This bill attempts to hold all three of these values together, instead of choosing one at the expense of the others. Right now, our emergency housing system asks extraordinarily riddle of the system itself, and ends up asking too much of everybody else, neighbors, municipalities, first responders, and the people stuck inside it. Leaving people indefinitely in motels without structure or services isn't kindness, and it isn't conservative or progressive, it is avoidance. This bill says we can be humane without being hands off and accountable without being punitive. For colleagues who worry about compassion, this bill locks in protections that don't depend on who's in office or what the politics are that year. Cold weather shelter was still universal. Survivors have been masked of violence stay protected. Disability is defined broadly, accommodations are required, and people are not reprimanded for incapacity of system failures. Those are not negotiable add ons. Those are core features written into statute. For colleagues who worry about responsibility and stewardship. This bill finally draws an honest line. Emergency housing is temporary. Expectations are clear. Hotels are not a long term solution. Time limits exist, but they are realistic and pause when the system can't deliver. Accountability applies to the state as much as to the individual as much as to the provider. That's not ideology. That's governance. For those concerned about politics, this bill deliberately takes homeless out of the constant emergency cycle. It sunsets, it requires reporting, it measures outcome instead of intentions that gives future legislators, regardless of party the ability adjust based on evidence rather than opinion. Most importantly, this bill respects the people we're trying to help by refusing to trap them in a system that's gone that goes nowhere. Dignity is just isn't a warm night tonight, it's a path forward tomorrow. A system that stabilizes without transitioning is not neutral. It quietly gives up on people. This bill says Vermont shouldn't do that. You don't have to believe this bill is perfect to believe it's more honest than what we're doing now. It doesn't ask us to abandon compassion or accountability. It asks us to stop pretending we can have one over the other. In short, this bill lays the foundation for a phased transition. First, stabilize the system with clear top tiers, funding and oversight, then expand regional autonomy as capacity and performance metrics mature. This approach reduces risk while honoring the long term goal of community led solutions. The modern homelessness crisis demands both immediate stabilization and long term structural reform. H91 envisioned a decentralized community led system under B. EARTH, shifting control to regional agencies and other housing human services partners. While that approach aligns with best practices for local response nimittus, excuse me, response nimittus,

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: just made that word up. Its implementation face concerns about readiness, oversight, and funding predictability. H five ninety four offers a pragmatic middle ground. It sets up clear statewide framework with tiered housing options, accountability measures, and substantial appropriations to expand shelter and permanent housing capacity. These elements address the infrastructure gaps and governance risks that hindered h 90 one's rollout. By embedding strong oversight, time limits, case management and performance reporting, H594 creates a stable foundation for systematic change. At the same time, it is highly amendable. I want to repeat that it is highly amendable. To incorporate regional flexibility, mobile outreach and community based pilots feature central to H ninety one philosophy. In effect, this bill builds the operational and housing capacity that H ninety one assume would exist, while phasing in local control over measurable standards. Over time, we could use this bill structure to transition toward full regional administration ensuring that decentralization occurs only after systems, staffing and housing stock are in place. In short, H594 is not a competing vision, but a sequential approach for stabilizing scale with accountability, then evolve toward community led governance. I believe this bridge strategy reduces risk, accelerates capacity building and positions Vermont to achieve H91's long term goals without repeating past implementation challenges. In essence, five ninety four aligns with Vermont's fiscal and policy goals, spend smarter, not just more and ensure emergency housing stays a bridge, not a destination on path toward affordable permanent homes.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Feel like I should clap on this. Thank you very much, Eric. Very well said. And we're just we're going to have lots of opportunity to ask more questions and share our perspectives. So given the time frame that we have and the length of the bill, I'm going to move right to Katie to review the bill. Thank you very much. Very well said. Thank you, Katie. And members, you can find this bill on our webpage, H594.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: You'll be doing the walk through, Bill Cash.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I'm to disappoint you. Okay,

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: I'm pulling up the document. Okay. Here we go. H five ninety four. As a place to start, I know you're all familiar with the GA budget process that happens every year for emergency housing. We see it right here in the title, the statement of purpose, that this covers two fiscal years. So this proposal would be for fiscal years '27 and '28. We have a purpose section to start. The purpose of this act to ensure that narrowly tailored temporary emergency housing assistance is available to only the most vulnerable Vermonters in crisis through fiscal year twenty eight in a manner that encounters, excuse me, encourages efficient and accountable use of taxpayer funds. At the top of page two, establish clear eligibility criteria, accountability measures, and case management requirements. Transition from reliance on hotels and motels towards sustainable permanent housing solutions, including recovery housing, transitional housing, and VHAP.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Katie? Yep. Can I just interrupt for minute? So I feel like Eric sort of We heard sort of the That's the screamable part. Why don't we skip

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: jump ahead? So that brings us to page three, section two. So we have an administering agency department office or designated entity responsible for implementing and overseeing the provisions of the act. We have a definition of alternative housing options, means housing options such as shelters, transitional housing, recovery residences, shared housing arrangements, host home models, master lease units, and rapid rehousing placements. The applicant is the person or the household that's applying for assistance under the program. Case management services are the supports connecting households to public benefits, health care, employment and permanent housing. Cold weather emergency shelter means publicly funded shelter beds made available to individuals during periods when temperatures or weather conditions pose a risk to health and safety. Department means DCF. Disability means physical, sensory, cognitive, developmental or mental health condition that substantially limits one or more life activities or requires ongoing support, accommodation, treatment, maintain the individual's health, safety or independence. The term includes chronic or episodic conditions that significantly impact daily functioning regardless of whether the individual is receiving or is eligible to receive federal disability benefits. There's a section that dives into disability eligibility in more detail. Subdivision A is the eligible household. Means an individual or a group of individuals, respectively, without a fixed nighttime residence or an immediate risk of losing housing within seven days is verified by the administering agency. Emergency housing is temporary shelter, lodging or other housing support provided to eligible individuals or eligible households when no safe alternative housing option is immediately available. Emergency housing assistance is the provision of shelter, temporary accommodations or related services necessary to protect health, safety and welfare of eligible individuals and eligible households. Homeless means lacking a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence, including individuals and households that reside in places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, abandoned buildings or streets. Means reside in emergency shelter or temporary housing or exiting an institution where they temporarily resided and have no permanent housing to return to or are at imminent risk of losing a primary nighttime residence, as determined by the administering agency. A household is an individual or group of individuals with or without children who present together for emergency housing assistance and who identify as a unit for the purpose of obtaining housing or shelter. A minor child, somebody 18. Program is a temporary emergency housing and accountability program being established here. Recovery housing is sober supportive housing specifically designed for individuals in recovery from substance use disorder. We have definitions for a survivor of domestic violence. We have a definition of transitional housing, meaning time limited housing with services designed to support residents and achieving permanent housing stability. The lengthy definition section, and then we get to page six, which is the program itself. So in subsection A, the program is established. And as I said, it is covering fiscal years '27 and '28. The program is established. It's administered by DCF's Economic Services Division for the purposes of, and we have a list, providing temporary emergency housing to individuals and eligible households experiencing homelessness or at imminent risk of homelessness, reducing reliance on hotels and motels, expanding the use of alternative housing options in partnership with community partners, municipalities and private landlords, integrating case management and individualized housing plans into all emergency housing placements, ensuring accountability, transparency, cost efficiency. And then we get into different tiered levels of care under the program. So the Department is to implement a tiered continuum framework to serve individuals and families experiencing homelessness, including those receiving emergency housing assistance pursuant to the Act. The continuum shall consist of these tiers listed in order of priority and progression. First, we have tier one, which is the high barrier shelter, first option. In Subdivision A, the high barrier shelters are to serve as the preferred initial placement for eligible individuals and households where capacity staffing and geographic accessibility are available. These shelters are to provide structured rules, mandatory participation in case management and program accountability measures. Second, under this category, individuals who are placed in these shelters have the ability to participate in structured programming, including mandatory case management, housing stability planning and employment education or treatment services as appropriate, and have the physical and behavioral ability to comply with the program expectations. And then under Subdivision C, hotels and motels are only to be used for temporary overflow during periods where shelter capacity where there's a shortage subject to the limitations in Section eight of this act. That's where we look at hotels and motels specifically. The next tier is tier 1A, which is low barrier shelter. The low barrier shelters serve eligible individuals or individual households unable or unwilling to participate immediately in the high barrier shelter. At the top of page eight, low barrier shelter shall minimize barriers to entry by reducing the rules and programmatic requirements used in high barrier shelters while requiring access to case management and other housing support services. And then in Subdivision C, the department is to prioritize individuals and low barrier shelter for transition to the higher barrier shelter or housing as described below. Next, line seven, that brings us to tier two, which is transitional and recovery housing. This is time limited housing with structured support services to stabilize and prepare eligible individuals and households for permanent housing. Transitional and recovery housing shall include housing for individuals exiting treatment for substance use disorder or with a history of substance use disorder. Next, on Line 14 is Tier 2A, permanent and temporary supportive housing. Temporary or permanent supportive housing programs shall be provided to eligible individuals and households requiring ongoing intensive supports to maintain housing stability. Permanent supportive housing shall provide long term, non time limited housing combined with voluntary supportive services for individuals with complex needs, including chronic homelessness, serious mental illness or long term recovery needs. At the top of page nine, these temporary supportive housing services may include time limited supportive units to serve as a bridge for eligible individuals and eligible households transitioning from shelter to transitional housing, but who are not yet ready for independent living. Under B, supportive services may include case management, mental health and substance use treatment coordination, peer support, life skills, tenancy support, and employment services. This tier, which is Tier 2A, serves as an intermediate stabilization option prior to Tier three, which is the long term placement, when appropriate as the final permanent placement for eligible individuals and eligible households requiring indefinite supportive services. Lastly, on line 12, we have Tier three, which is BHIP and permanent housing. The tier provides long term stable housing solutions, including subsidized units, BHIP supported units and repurposed hotels and motels previously used for general assistance emergency housing that are now converted to workforce or transitional housing. Subsection B is all of our tiers. And now we go into what are the requirements for placement in these tiers. Eligible individuals and households are to be placed in the highest needed tier appropriate to their circumstances, with high barrier shelter as the default except where low barrier shelter is necessary to ensure immediate success. Top of page 10. Movement between the tiers is to prioritize progress towards permanent housing, minimizing reliance on temporary hotel and motel placements. Eligible individuals and households shall not be denied placement, sanctioned or deemed non compliant under the section due to the unavailability of shelter beds, housing placements or case management services, treatment capacity or other system resources outside the control of those individuals or households. And then we have some language about coordination reporting. The department is to coordinate the services provided in the high barrier shelters, low barrier shelters, transitional housing program, VHIP units, recovery housing units, cold weather shelters to ensure efficient use of resources. Eligible individuals and households, placement, their duration of stay and progression through the tiers are to be reported pursuant to Section 15. You'll see a lot of references to Section 15. That's a big reporting requirement with lots of subdivisions. In terms of prioritization, the tiered continuum of care established here is to prioritize eligible individuals and households that meet vulnerability criteria, including disability, age, chronic homelessness and domestic violence status. That lays out the program structure, and then Section four goes into eligibility. And this is broken up into a few different subsections. So the first subsection, we cover eligibility generally. Eligible individuals and eligible households in the program shall shall be in need of emergency housing assistance and physically present in Vermont as verified by one or more of the following. A Vermont issued driver's license or ID card, a lease or utility bill for Vermont property or other proof of presence in the state, or documentation from a Vermont based social service provider or health care provider licensed or certified and practicing in Vermont. Recent program violations or misconduct shall render an otherwise eligible individual temporarily ineligible for participation in the program. The Department is to prioritize services to vulnerable populations, including individuals with verified disabilities, individuals over six years of age, individuals who are pregnant, parents or guardians caring for minor children and survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault or human trafficking. For non emergency needs and longer term supports under the program, the Department may consider domicile in and connection to Vermont. However, no individual is to be denied emergency life safety shelter solely on the basis of citizenship or immigration status. The next subsection is verification of residency. Eligibility for emergency housing under the program is to be based on the individual's or household's current physical presence in Vermont and verified need. The Department may consider domicile in connection to Vermont for non emergency needs, as was addressed above. But emergency life safety shelter is not to be denied solely on the basis of citizenship or immigration status. For emergency placements, the Department is to accept any reasonable documentation evidencing identity and presence in the state, including government issued ID, administering agency documentation or self attestation corroborated by collateral information when other documentation is not reasonably available. For non emergency needs, the Department is to accept reasonable documentation of domicile and in connection with Vermont in a manner specified by the Commissioner of DCF and rule. Domicile and in connection to Vermont may be verified for non emergency supports and redetermined periodically or when the individual or household circumstances change. All the documentation submitted pursuant to the section is subject to verification by the Department in coordination with the Department of Taxes and DMV. The Department is to permit presumptive eligibility for a period of up to fourteen days for applicants who attest to meeting the residency requirement but lack immediate access to the necessary documents, provided that documentation is actively pursued during that period. And then there is language vote verification of a disability. Proof of the individual's disability shall be verified by a health care provider licensed or certified and practicing in Vermont. A determination or certification from a state or federally recognized agency or program that provides services to individuals with disabilities. Documentation from an educational institution, service provider or social service agency in Vermont with knowledge of the individual's disability or self attestation by the individual subject to verification by the administering agency when other documentation is not reasonably available. At the top of page 14, an individual is not to be required to establish eligibility for the program slowly through federal disability benefits determination or award. And the status of an individual with a disability shall be verified during the individual's initial application process and redetermined as appropriate at most every thirty six months or upon a material change to their condition with flexible acceptance of provider notes, benefit statements, self attestation corroborated by collateral information. The next subsection has to do with fraud prevention. An applicant or program participant who knowingly provides false, misleading or incomplete information regarding their residency, disability status or household composition or other eligibility criteria is subject to immediate denial or termination of benefits under the program and repayment of improperly received benefits, which shall be recovered through administrative or civil processes. The Department may refer cases suspected of fraud to the Office of the Attorney General and the State's Attorney for Investigation Prosecution under applicable state law. The Department shall provide clear written notice to all applicants regarding penalties for fraud at the time of their application. And the department shall not impose a penalty upon an individual household for a good faith and material error that was corrected upon notice within a reasonable time period. Next, returning to case management and accountability. A participant in the program shall be required to participate in ongoing case management services with a state contracted case manager, comply with an individualized housing stability plan, including participation in employment, treatment or housing search activities as appropriate, and abide by the program rules. The Department and its contractors must comply with Title II of the ADA, Section 54 of the Rehabilitation Act for the purposes of providing reasonable modifications, effective communication and accessible placement program rules. Case management requirements and sanctions are to be reasonably modified as necessary before discrimination against qualified individuals with a disability. Eligible individuals and eligible households shall have secular alternatives to any faith based or ideological programming. The Department shall not penalize an eligible individual or eligible household for declining religious activities. An individual shall be ineligible for assistance for thirty days under the program unless extenuating circumstances are documented by the Department when the individual knowingly and willingly fails to check-in to an assigned housing placement, refuses to comply with program commitments, responsibilities and obligations, declines in alternative housing option or engages in behavior that the Department identifies as misconduct. Sanctions that are issued under this section shall not be imposed when the eligible individual is noncompliant as primarily attributable to cognitive impairment, active mental health crisis, substance withdrawal, developmental disability or other documented condition that materially limits the individual's ability to comply unless reasonable accommodations have been offered and documented. Reapplication after sanction shall require a new eligibility determination, verification compliance with housing and search requirements and participation in relevant services. An individual engaged in criminal activity may be subject to immediate termination where necessary for the safety of the individual, other program participants or program staff, followed by a prompt post deprivation hearing within ten days following the termination. Otherwise, termination in the program shall only occur after the Department provides notice to the individual, creating a written decision stating the findings and reasons for the Department's decision and an opportunity to be heard. We have language about ratios for case management services. The Department shall allocate funds sufficient to ensure case management services are delivered in ratios not to exceed one case manager for 25 participants in a high barrier shelter placement and one case manager for 35 participants in a low barrier transitional or supportive housing placement. Then we have a definition of misconduct. It was used up above in this section. It means enumerated behaviors that materially endanger the safety of others, involve the destruction of property, or constitute repeated refusals placement following a documented suitability assessment and reasonable accommodations.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I'm going to pause here just for a moment. We have still roughly half of the bill to get through, and we're expected on the floor at 01:00. O'clock, sorry, excuse me. I'm just looking up and I was seeing a different time. My apologies. I keep going back and forth between ups and down. I need them for reading, but not for up, it got blurry for

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: a moment.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I thought that was five of three, so Okay. I needed the breakers. Okay. Section

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: six. This is the program time limits. So assistance under the program is limited by tier as follows. For one and one A, placements shall not exceed sixty days. For two and two A, placements shall not exceed one hundred and eighty days. The time limits shall be told during periods in which an eligible individual or eligible household is actively awaiting placement in housing, treatment or services for which the eligible individual eligible household is otherwise eligible for. Under subsection c, the department may grant hardship extensions pursuant to criteria adopted by the commissioner and rule, including for medical necessity, lack of reasonable accessible alternative placements, family unity needs, imminent severe weather, imminent risk of health and safety subject to written findings. For a denial of services or termination, which could result in imminent risk to health or safety, the department shall provide temporary placement, pending appeal, or alternative accommodation. We have language about fair hearing. An applicant for or a participant in the program has the right to a fair hearing before the Human Services Board. When the applicant when the application for assistance under the program is denied in whole or part, the participant's benefits are terminated, reduced or suspended, or the applicant or participant believes that benefits have not been provided in accordance with the applicable laws, rules or policies. A written notice is provided to the applicant or participant whose participation is denied or reduced or suspended or terminated. The contents of that notice has to include specific factual and legal basis for the Department's decision, effective date of the action, the statement of the right to request a fair hearing under this section, and also fair instructions on the process and deadlines for filing the appeal. The individual shall file a request for a fair hearing with the board within ninety days following the date of the individual's receipt of that written notice. If the individual files a request within ten days after receiving the department's notice of termination of services, the department is to continue to provide services under the program without interruption until a decision is issued by the Human Services Board, unless the participant voluntarily waives continued benefits. Hearings are to be conducted in accordance with due process standards, including the right to present evidence, cross examine witnesses, and be represented by counsel or another authorized representative. And then the board is to issue a written decision that sets forth the findings of fact conclusions of law, and the basis for its decision. Page 20. So now we're at the section that governs hotel and motel use. First, we have legislative intent. This legislative intent? Yes. The binding. The general assembly finds that Vermont's reliance on hotels and motels for general assistance emergency housing is unsustainable. And then we have some targets. In fiscal year '27, there shall be a maximum capacity of 400 hotel and motel rooms for the temporary emergency housing and accountability program. And then in subdivision two, it's the intent of the General Assembly, the hotel and motel rooms authorized for use as part of the program be reduced to the minimum practicable level in fiscal year twenty eight and eliminated only upon certification from the commissioner for children and families to human services and health and welfare, a sufficient shelter and housing capacity exists statewide to meet demand. So one is b one is a a do this. Two is a intent section because it's linked to appropriations. So just flagging that maybe for further conversation. Subsection C, in the two fiscal years, the department is to increase VHIP supported permanent housing units, expand shelter capacity statewide, repurpose hotels and motels previously used for GA emergency housing into transitional or workforce housing. Notwithstanding the language above, where no safe reasonable alternative exists, and denial of a hotel or motel room would likely result in imminent risk to health or safety, the Department may authorize temporary hotel or motel placement pending appeal or transition to an appropriate alternative. A standalone section on domestic violence housing. Domestic violence survivors shall be served through a program administered by the Vermont Domestic and Sexual Violence Organizations under contract with the Department that is separate from the Temporary Emergency Housing and Accountability Program. Use of hotels and motels may continue for this population where no discrete safe housing alternatives exist. Hotel and motel usage by domestic violence survivors shall not count towards the maximum capacities identified in Section eight above. Section on cold weather shelter. The Department shall maintain sufficient cold weather emergency shelter capacity to ensure that no individual is unsheltered during extreme weather conditions. Eligibility for cold weather shelter shall not be limited by residency, disability or time limits. Recovery and transitional housing. As recovery housing and transitional housing are integral components of the Tiered Continuum of Care, HS shall expand access to recovery housing for individuals exiting incarceration or treatment for substance use disorder and support transitional housing models that bridge emergency housing assistance and permanent housing. Workforce and provider stability. HS shall prioritize workforce stability in the implementation of this act, including retention and recruitment incentives for shelter and housing staff, support for rural and mobile service delivery models, and expanded use of peer support and community based staffing levels. And we have some rulemaking language. You've heard rules referenced a few times at this point. So this directs the commissioner to adopt permanent rules for the implementation of the program as soon as feasible. While the permanent rules are pending, the commissioner is to adopt emergency rules, which shall be deemed to have met the emergency rulemaking standard. And both the emergency and the permanent rules have to address document verification protocols for residency and disability status, random or targeted audits of eligibility documentation, coordination with other state and federal benefit programs to prevent duplication. And then we get to two sections on reporting. So on 01/15/2028, the Commissioner for DCF is to submit a written program integrity report regarding the program to the appropriations committees and the committees of jurisdictions addressing the number of fraud investigations initiated and resolved, the dollar value of improperly paid benefits recovered, and the effectiveness of the verification and enforcement measures established in this. The next is the longer report I was referring to before. This would also come in 01/15/2728. Requires the commissioner of DCF to submit a written report about the implementation of the program since the start of the preceding fiscal year to appropriations committees and to the committees of jurisdiction with a copy of the report posted on its website. And this report addresses the number of individuals and households served through the program by household size and if applicable, by eligibility category, region, service provider, and service category. Program expenditures, including cost per household, the number of households that have been successfully transitioned to permanent housing since the previous reporting period, the types of housing settings participants have been placed in, and any supportive services a participant is receiving in conjunction with the participant's housing. The number of individuals and households returning to homelessness after placement in permanent housing and the reason for the return to homelessness. The number of diversions from homelessness made during the previous reporting period. Change in shelter bed, nursing home, and residential care home capacity since the previous reporting period. The average length of stay and outcomes following an individual's or household's exit from the program. The number of VHIP supported units created and utilized for individuals and households exiting the program the number of transitional recovery housing beds funded or utilized under the program fraud prevention and enforcement data as required under the previous section, the total expenditures by category, including for household costs, comparisons across hotel, shelter, and permanent housing options, the number of households whose intake assessment indicated a potential need for services for each department within AHS, workforce capacity, vacancy rates, and service delivery impacts, The identification of any indicators triggering an effective action plan, including an increase in unsheltered homelessness, statewide shelter capacity utilization exceeding 95% for more than thirty consecutive days, or sanctions imposed on more than 15% of program participants within the reporting period. Then subsection B says refers back up to the reporting requirement we just looked at in 14. That if any indicator identified in that 14 occurs, the department is to submit a corrective plan to the committees of jurisdiction within sixty days following their occurrence. Next, we're shifting gears. This is an initiative that would allow individuals to provide support to rejoin family out of state. So in subsection A, the General Assembly recognizes that with limited human services resources, some individuals experiencing homelessness may find that their families or home states are better equipped to provide long term care and support. There is established a return to home program administered by DCF in fiscal years '27 and '28. This program shall provide travel expenses and relocation assistance for certain homeless individuals who wish to return to their home states. For the purposes of this program, the department shall establish a public private partnership for contracting with eligible nonprofit organizations or for profit organizations, seek the participation of local transportation providers, Work with homeless outreach programs to ensure that individuals who wish to participate in the program are made aware of it and that vulnerable populations, including victims of domestic violence or human trafficking, are not involuntarily displaced and participation is strictly voluntary. Ensure that an individual may participate in the program if the individual agrees to participate voluntarily and provides informed written consent, maintains legal residency in a state other than Vermont, does not have a verifiable permanent address in Vermont, lacks financial independence, including a return ticket or the means to return home, is unemployed and is reliant or at risk of becoming reliant on state assistance programs. It would prohibit an individual with at least one dependent child who resides in the state or an individual receiving medical treatment that cannot be interrupted from participating in the program. Verifies the information necessary to determine an individual's eligibility to prevent fraudulent claims or involuntary displacement. It would enable an individual who alleges involuntary participation or who wishes to participate but is denied eligibility to immediately appeal to the Human Services Board. Provides written disclosure in the individual's primary language and provides an interpreter services as needed and a seventy two hour cooling off period before travel, which the individual may request to waive. And lastly, there is to be a report on 01/15/2728, the appropriations committees and to the committee's jurisdiction, addressing the number of participants' costs, outcomes, and any recommended legislation. The department is not to take an adverse action or denial of any other services against an individual for their refusal to participate in the program, and the department shall not condition other benefits on the individual's agreement to relocate under the section. And then in subsection c, appeals related to the program, determinations shall receive an expedited review within five business days, and relocation shall be automatically stayed pending decision unless the applicant requests immediate travel. And we have some definitions related to home state, permanent address, and state assistance programs. Gonna jump to appropriations. Fiscal year '27, the 30,000,030 million is appropriated to DCF from the general fund for the following purposes. 10,000,000 shall be used by the Department to operate the temporary emergency housing and accountability program. 6,000,000 to be used by the Department to expand statewide shelter capacity. 4,000,000 to be used by the department to contract for additional transitional and recovery housing developments. 4,000,000 shall be used by the department to contract for repurposing of hotels and motels previously used for GA emergency housing into transitional and workforce housing. And 6,000,000 shall be used by the department for the expansion of the HIP supported permanent housing units. And then in b, well, because we're dealing fiscal year 20 appropriations, we see this intent language. It's the intent of the General Assembly to appropriate 25,000,000 from the General Fund to the Department for the following. 8,000,000 to operate the program, 6,000,000 to expand statewide shelter capacity, 3,000,000 to contract for additional transitional and recovery housing developments, 3,000,000 used by the Department to contract for the repurposing of hotels and motels previously used for GA emergency housing into transitional workforce housing, 5,000,000 to be used by the department for the expansion of VHIP supported permanent housing units. Any fiscal year '27 unexpended funds are to be carried forward to expand VHIP supported housing units or expand shelter, recovery housing, transitional housing capacity or both. It's the intent that any unexpended funds in 2018 related to the program be also be carried forward for the same purposes. And any funds carried forward pursuant to the section are to be identified as part of the section 15 report. You've made it to the end.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay, well there's a lot to unpack here, and we're going to start that process. Today started that process. First, why don't we just see if people have any particular sort of drafting legal questions or anything like that that relate to that are directed towards Katie. So Roxanne and McGill.

[Rep. Jubilee McGill]: Oh, it's Katie and Eric. I was just wondering on the case management number ratios, the high barrier, low barrier. I was a little surprised to

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: see It's not realistic. It's gotta be true.

[Rep. Jubilee McGill]: Well, yeah, I wasn't even gonna comment on that. Think sometimes a high barrier, low barrier, like a low barrier shelter, those people often have the highest need. So And I was just wondering if that was reversed, if that was a drafting mistake or just

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: That was my error. And I sent that on in because you're correct, those numbers should be

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay. Other questions? Go ahead, representative.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Bringing the non knowledge voice here, I would wonder if we would want a definition of high barrier and low barrier somewhere because you all know what that means, but I don't know exactly.

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: Me neither.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: And it might help citizens to make. Okay,

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: thank you. Are there other questions, comments? So, as you know, hopefully by now, we'll be going through this with a

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: fine I tooth

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: think I've been upfront with people that I would expect to, and as Eric said earlier, this is highly amendable. Highly amendable. I wanna make sure I heard him correctly. The first time I heard him say that, was say amenable or amenable. He could say amenable.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Like writing the stuff, thinking about the thing and then like trying to read the words that I wrote

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: and say, this was that way too many odds, why am I?

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: So, and I've been upfront about it. You'll see elements, references to things that we actually talked about in H91 sprinkled throughout this. There are some things that actually are being implemented now from H91 that we would want to incorporate in here. And so we're going to do our due diligence about this. I do want people to know that we are going to hear obviously from a number of witnesses. I am going to encourage people that if they need to have a refresher on some of the topics, we're not going back to zero. Okay? We're not rewinding all the way back to pretending that we've never heard about homelessness and all the supports and services in the system. If you feel like you need a refresher, I'm going to encourage you to go back to the YouTube video results. Hopefully you can find them. If you can't, I'm sure IT can find them for you, of some of the testimony that we took last year and some of the documents that we looked at last year. So we're going to build upon that. So we're be going hearing from people who we didn't hear from before. We're going to be hearing from the agency of transportation. We're going to be hearing from the medical center. We're going to be hearing from the nurses union. We're going to be looking at some of these elements as they fit in or are different from the system that we have now, an abuse system very loosely with lots of brands around it or quotations. We're going to stay in close touch with the Department for Children and Families and the Agency of Human Services. And I want you to know that Eric and I met with them during lunchtime, and they are fully committed to having a system that is better than what we have now. I am sure that we are going to have differences of opinion as we move through this. And hopefully, there won't be things that derail a process that helps us get to something that is different than creating quote unquote policy through the budget bill every session. So I find that encouraging and we'll see. We'll see how this goes. And we will obviously be hearing from people who are providing services. We'll be hearing from advocates. We'll be hearing from people with lived experience again. But we're not gonna go all the way back to the basics. So again, we're building on what we already heard from hours and hours and hours of testimony last year. And if you need any help finding that testimony, if you want to refresh yourselves, please let me know and I'll do my best to help you find it. I just wanted to people to have that sort of as background. Go ahead, Representative Donahue.

[Rep. Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Thanks. Yeah, this is sort of a follow-up question. Also, maybe a broad question for Eric, just for big picture. The term low barrier shelter is really pretty broadly known, and I think, yeah, having a clear definition would be helpful. I've never heard the term high barrier, high barrier shelter before, and maybe all it maybe it does exist currently and it just needs a definition. It almost feels like that was created to make it different from low barrier. But the kind of the lay implications, if you will, of a term like that is okay. One's the kind that we want to help people get into and the other is the kind that we want to have lots of obstacles to you being able to access rather than it's what we really want you to access because it's the most supportive, but it requires things of you. So just it's maybe a quick answer, or maybe it's just something to think about if it's not a quick answer in terms of current use.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: I think a more appropriate term to to use instead of high barrier is kind of the term I'm using in regards to the shelter that's been developed in in Rotland. Program, right, what does that look like? So program being, well, program has levels of responsivity. So within each level of programming, there could be different obligations, commitments, requirements both upon the provider and the participant. So I think a more defining it as a program ready, so low barrier, easiest access that next step being program ready, whatever that looked like can be defined according to what's available.

[Rep. Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Great, thanks. Representative Steady? In

[Rep. Brenda Steady]: one part, you wrote about the mandatory participation. I didn't say anything about consequences if they didn't participate. There's got to be consequences, or they're going to just say, I don't want to do it. Just like school, if you don't do your homework, you get a nap. Do they get loose housing for thirty days or what happens?

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: No, the participation is based upon their engagement with the individualized housing plan that they develop with the case manager. So how that is engaged and how that is operated between participant and case managers based upon the discretion of both operators. So if you're asking whether or not if somebody chooses to not engage with their case manager, that's up to the discretion of how the program is operated in regards to response to that. Well, there should be some consequences. What's the fine consequence?

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: So we can talk about that. Yeah, that would

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: be more into

[Rep. Brenda Steady]: the meat of it.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Yeah, when we get to kind of like delving into each section of the bill. Obviously, this bill touches on a very sort of broad approach in thinking about So broad, but time limited at the same time, which I think is interesting for us to be thinking about. And I think, Eric, you sort of talked about this as a transition, pathway to something that might ultimately to more community based, community run programming in the future. So let's kind of keep that intent in mind as we look at that. I'm not sure that it totally is clear, but that's what the intent is. But if that's the way the committee wants to proceed after we hear from witnesses, then we certainly can think about how that might work. Go ahead.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: I just wanted to clarify something because when we looked down, wasn't necessarily, and I probably should have clarified this greater with Katie, what's going on through recovery housing. I'm not just specifically saying recovery units. I'm not using recovery in the context of what we hear around here, recovery of substance abuse. Recovery has a broad definition of recovery from coming out of maybe some mental health crises. Like that. The idea was to make the investments across the line in socials, in like, what do you call our human services, social services, different levels of programming, whether it's mental health program, child, substance abuse, individuals that just experienced a just a quick briefness of homelessness. So I just wanted to clarify that Please, for anybody in recovery that's listening out there, know this money is not specifically designed to go to recovery housing. It's other aspects.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Always good to clarify what you intended. People see dollar signs and then they

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: We will look all the time to change that word. I get it.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: That's all good. Other questions for Eric or Katie? Okay, thank you both

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: for

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: all the work that you've put into this. And the other thing that I just mentioned, because I know there are people listening and there are obviously people in the room. Don't kill me. If you are interested, you or any individuals that you are affiliated or interested in testifying on this bill, I'm gonna ask you to give Lori your name and contact information if she doesn't already have it. We will be in touch about what the schedule would look like. And I'm also asking people to comment on things, I guess I would say, where they see positive direction and also things that seem like what people might consider hard stops, things that would cause you to not support the bill at all, essentially. If you have particular suggestions, those are always welcome as well. So when we adjourn, don't everybody run over and talk to Lori. Give her a moment. But we obviously will be taking a great deal of testimony on this, but I also do want to encourage people, we don't need to kind of like go over the crisis of homelessness in Vermont. That's an agreed upon Everybody is starting with that baseline. Okay? So we don't need to rehash that. And for those individuals who have direct connections with folks with lived experience, I would love to ask if you would be willing to help us facilitate respectful testimony where people with lived experience so they can tell us what they feel would work for them or what did work for them if they're not homeless anymore. So appreciate that assistance for the committee. Any questions? And I will now at this time also entertain any questions from people around the table and outside of the table if you have any questions about what our intent is in terms of moving forward.

[Rep. Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Okay.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I think that then will do it on H594 for right now. And you have a few minutes of spare time between we are required to be at the floor

[Katie (Legislative Counsel)]: at

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: three